The Bible Translator: Volume 22, Issue 4

Considers five kinds of translation problems: (1) visions; (2) technical vocabulary; (3) proverbs; (4) idioms; (5) cryptic language. The basic issue under each problem is: (1) need to distinguish meaning of the words, “visions, words” and “oracles”; (2) particularly numerical sequence justifies literal translation or at least an intensive one; (3) attempt to translate Hebrew proverbs with a figure of similar genre; (4) account for the vernacular and grammatical problems without introducing additional components and (5) recourse to the historical data behind a hard phrase poses the universal issue which gives the translation expression. View Less

A critical review of the major arguments lying behind modern translations of Gen. 1:1–3 is made under four headings: (1) lexical and grammatical arguments; (2) syntactical arguments; (3) arguments based on parallels; (4) stylistic arguments. The thesis that translation cannot rest alone on 1 and 2, but on the combined interplay of all four leads to the conclusion that Genesis 1:1 is the main clause of those sentences. The major points under each heading are: (1) whether bere’sit is in construct or absolute state; (2) whether vs. 2 is a parenthetic clause; (3) whether Gen. 2:4b-7 or the Sumerian-Babylonian myths provide parallel structure; (4) regular use of brief sentences. View Less

1 Sam. 15:32 is translated differently in modern versions depending upon how two problems are resolved: (1) the meaning of the Hebrew word describing Agag’s attitude; (2) What did Agag say? When firstly the noun describing Agag’s state is analyzed, the diversity in guesses of its root meaning brings the choice that it means trembling. Secondly, a variety of textual evidence is set forth to support the translation “surely it is bitter death,” as opposed to the MT reading. View Less

Suggests controls for safeguarding form and meaning of the biblical message in translation. (1) When form and meaning correspond between the two languages, problems are minimal. (2) Where form is the same but meaning different, translation ought not misrepresent the biblical form. We might assign relative importance to biblical forms: (a) form of historical fact is primary, while form as a teaching device makes meaning more important; (b) words with important symbolic functions ought to be retained; (c) where form is prominent in biblical context, it must also be in translation. (3) When source language form is quite different in receptor language, a variety of translation solutions must be used. View Less

Indicates how an incentive payment plan for Bible translators improved translation speed with sustained quality. It is based upon 5 language projects begun in the Philippines in 1968. Five variables are identified: (1) description of the translation committees; (2) difficulties encountered, including factors affecting accuracy of data presented; (3) cites time, subdivided into the steps for drafting, commenting and a three-staged revision for narrative and non-narrative material; (4) summary of problems with the plan; and (5) a listing of certain recommendations for using the program. View Less